Wear and migration of highly cross-linked and conventional cemented polyethylene cups with cobalt chrome or Oxinium femoral heads: A randomized radiostereometric study of 150 patients

This randomized study was performed to compare wear and migration of five different cemented total hip joint articulations in 150 patients. The patients received either a Charnley femoral stem with a 22.2 mm head or a Spectron EF femoral stem with a 28 mm head. The Charnley articulated with a γ‐ster...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of orthopaedic research Vol. 29; no. 8; pp. 1222 - 1229
Main Authors Kadar, Thomas, Hallan, Geir, Aamodt, Arild, Indrekvam, Kari, Badawy, Mona, Skredderstuen, Arne, Havelin, Leif Ivar, Stokke, Terje, Haugan, Kristin, Espehaug, Birgitte, Furnes, Ove
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Hoboken Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company 01.08.2011
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:This randomized study was performed to compare wear and migration of five different cemented total hip joint articulations in 150 patients. The patients received either a Charnley femoral stem with a 22.2 mm head or a Spectron EF femoral stem with a 28 mm head. The Charnley articulated with a γ‐sterilized Charnley Ogee acetabular cup. The Spectron EF was used with either EtO‐sterilized non‐cross‐linked polyethylene (Reflection All‐Poly) or highly cross‐linked (Reflection All‐Poly XLPE) cups, combined with either cobalt chrome (CoCr) or Oxinium femoral heads. The patients were followed with repeated RSA measurements for 2 years. After 2 years, the EtO‐sterilized non‐cross‐linked Reflection All‐Poly cups had more than four times higher proximal penetration than its highly cross‐linked counterpart. Use of Oxinium femoral heads did not affect penetration at 2 years compared to heads made of CoCr. Further follow‐up is needed to evaluate the benefits, if any, of Oxinium femoral heads in the clinical setting. The Charnley Ogee was not outperformed by the more recently introduced implants in our study. We conclude that this prostheses still represents a standard against which new implants can be measured. © 2011 Orthopaedic Research Society Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 29: 1222–1229, 2011
Bibliography:istex:1A85569A871E4C25E36D0DA4FB31BC5847E30FCD
ark:/67375/WNG-N4J6DXR7-M
ArticleID:JOR21389
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ISSN:0736-0266
1554-527X
DOI:10.1002/jor.21389